What's all this I hear about Inertia ?

[Fenton Murray]

>This said.  Several of these posts seem to skirt the main issue involved 
>here, namely that if your hammer strike weight is too high for your 
>ratio, then the action is simply going to feel heavy in some sense or 
>another no matter what you do. Assist springs wont really change that 
>under play nearly as much as some will have it.

I agree.
Fenton
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Love" <davidlovepianos at comcast.net>
To: "'Pianotech List'" <pianotech at ptg.org>
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 12:18 PM
Subject: RE: What's all this I hear about Inertia ?


> Uh...by using assist springs.  Seems fairly clear.  
> 
> David Love
> davidlovepianos at comcast.net 
> www.davidlovepianos.com
> 
> 
> Greetings.
> 
>    On assist springs, I think they can make a bad action better by
>    allowing the removal of excess key lead, not the right way to fix
>    things. But, fooling around with these things I was able to 'feel'
>    the same action with different amounts of key lead, . An old 550
>    Kawai had a nice action until I unhooked the assist springs and
>    added lead.
>    Fenton
> 
> Curious as to how you got  "an action with the same hammers, ratio, and 
> BW, but different leading".  If you change the leading, then you change 
> the BW.  That is to say unless you changed the leading but kept the FW 
> constant.
> 
> This said.  Several of these posts seem to skirt the main issue involved 
> here, namely that if your hammer strike weight is too high for your 
> ratio, then the action is simply going to feel heavy in some sense or 
> another no matter what you do. Assist springs wont really change that 
> under play nearly as much as some will have it. Indeed, I've gotten to 
> the point where instead of feeling like I need some kind of assist 
> mechanism to tweek or fine tune BW, I'd rather use a basic stanwood 
> approach and add a diagnostic to tweek the ratio key to key for more 
> uniform touch.  Then too is the point that adjustable touch weight 
> schemes in the end address the static side of the equation more then the 
> dynamic. To what degree is another discussion.
> 
> Cheers
> RicB
> 
> 
> 
>